gAg CruSh3r
Member
This is a odd question but can Halo 2 be run on a Surface pro? I might be getting one soon for business, trips, and stuff.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Halo |OT19| 793 Posts, And None Worth Reading
- Thread starter Ozzy Onya A2Z
- Start date
- Status
What are the specs of a Surface Pro? Halo 2 is poorly optimized, I hear, so they'll need to be decent.
Just look up the specs then. There's no reason it can't run on a Surface if it can run on an equal PC, since the Surface is just a PC.
That...makes no sense at all. :/ Why would that slow you down? It's a piece of matter hitting you very hard. The only way a person is going to slow down is if you've damaged their flesh and they have to limp, which is not the case in Halo 4.
Just look up the specs then. There's no reason it can't run on a Surface if it can run on an equal PC, since the Surface is just a PC.
That...makes no sense at all. :/ Why would that slow you down? It's a piece of matter hitting you very hard. The only way a person is going to slow down is if you've damaged their flesh and they have to limp, which is not the case in Halo 4.
Should be able to just fine
Ummm.....
Please take some basic high school physics before you continue posting, thanks.
gAg CruSh3r
Member
Sweet deal! Now I can't wait to get one ha.
User 73706
Banned
It doesn't seem like the kind of thing that'll get clarified to any reasonable extent (and probably shouldn't, considering how ridiculous of a thing it is in the first place) but Halo's shielding systems have historically been poorly optimized for kinetic interpolation in the first place. If objects move slowly enough, they can outright bypass the shielding, for example when those Sentinels got killed with thrown rocks in Ghosts of Onyx. The opposite probably holds true as well: it's not measuring electromagnetic frequencies or damage output or anything like that, it's probably just trying to equalize whatever kinetic force the slugs / plasma throws at your shields.
Interesting. That still doesn't explain why your rate of movement would slow down while you are getting hit...while allowing you to go fast again after you are not getting it.
And maybe Tawpgun could actually explain what he means instead of saying something as hands off as that. I could easily say the same thing back and it wouldn't prove my point.
halo isn't very realistic as a game, unless there's super soldiers running around in power armor that we dont know about. Kinetics would play a role in slowing an object down.
HOW?! So you know of a real life instance where this happens? I do not.
Speedy Blue Dude
Banned
Ever watch a game of football?
aHebrewMenagerie
Member
I didn't get a fucking follow.
Microsoft what the fuck.
You need to buy 3 more Xbox Ones before you are eligible for a follow
A guy hitting another guy doesn't slow him down. It actually accelerates his speed for a moment. Grabbing him and pushing him to the ground stops him. Hitting him will not stop him or even slow him down (unless of course you hit him head on, but that's simply because now there is a huge, impenetrable mass in front of him that, because it cannot bury it's self into him, be absorbed into him, or bounce off of him, will slow him down or stop him). The act of hitting you doesn't slow you down. If I hit a person from behind, he keeps accelerating forward. If I hit him from behind in a game...this suddenly slows him down?
If you were running and I took some wax bullets and started shooting you, they would hurt really bad, and probably give you welts, but the bullets would in and of themselves not slow you down. That is up to you.
I didn't get a fucking follow.
Microsoft what the fuck.
itz k, me needer
*taps mic* this thing on? anyone else reading this?
So, apparently nobody is interested in what I'm saying.
Which is precisely why they are engaging me in conversation...right?
No, I just think your logic is 1000% flawed in saying that being hit would accelerate you. That may be true if you're shooting a brick moving forward from behind, but you're talking about shooting a person and lol at saying that you wouldn't slow down. Physics doesn't account for pain or emotion.
I'm assuming you've never seen anyone get shot despite wearing body armor. It's still an impact. Bullets have a strong impact because they go so fast. Force isn't a measure of the mass of an object, but the mass and its speed. It's impossible to determine how fast Halo bullets should realistically go. But lets assume they shoot significantly faster than our current firearms. We got 500 years of firearms advancement to work with here.
Being peppered by bullets will still have a significant impact on you. If you had an impenetrable shield and held it up to a hail of machine gun fire you would have a hard time making forward progress.
Another fun fact, the ancient romans used to have hundreds of "slingers" that would basically pelt their enemies with little lead pellets. Despite the enemies never having been significantly injured from these things, the force of them hitting you is enough to slow down an entire army.
Now, them being super soldiers in power armor is a different arguement entirely.
But at the end of the day its a fucking video game and the mechanic is there for balance.
May I ask what sort of education you have? (not being rude just curious).
Newtons third law of motion is the most likely explanation.
Say a bullet has a force of 50N and it collided, with a Spartan who is traveling in the other, direction with a force of 75N. The Spartan would be slowed to 25N and carry on moving slower than they were originally.
That makes sense I suppose, but it doesn't at all explain why shooting somebody from behind, say, would cause them to slow down.
And I do not think it helps with balance, as I explained in a post earlier.
I haven't taken super complex physics, but I know this much: It's not near that simple. You forget that mass (and shape, and other things) also factors into this equation. The bullet is not by it's self going to slow him down. In fact, the bullet, since it is supposed to go into him, will have even less resistance that that. It is also narrow, so it must go inside him with even less resistance.
Again, your argument, even if true, does not explain why hitting someone from behind one cause them to slow down. Remember things will continue in a certain direction unless acted upon. Therefore, why would a bullet hitting me from behind cause force to slow me down, when the only thing that should stop me from continuing to go forward, is something that should come from in front of me?
Sorry, I literally can't tell if you're being serious.
In Halo Reach there was a very effective offensive strategy known as melee rushing. You equip sprint and rush as a dude and as long as you get to melee range with him while having at least a sliver of shield left you could kill him with a double melee.
Not to mention people getting shot could sprint away at full speed to safety which was lame.
The mechanic was introduced to prevent these things.
aHebrewMenagerie
Member
I thought we were all Wahrer alts?
Anyway, since the sheilds can't straight up absorb the kinetic energy of the bullets, it displaces it all over the body, slowing you down. But if you're running away, idk. Game flow.
Wait, so we fix a broken mechanic to fix another one? Why not remove the mechanic that cause the trouble in the first place?
Sprint. It just doesn't work in Halo's sandbox.
Basically, that's how you know if a mechanic is bad: if you have to do a bunch of even slightly unreasonable extra stuff to compensate for it. Why not just own up the mistake and remove it?
Exactly, it's arbitrary. Arbitrary stuff is bad game design. It needs to be logical and based in explainable and reasonable reality to work. Remember, it's being controlled through real world means, so it ought to respond accordingly. I'm not saying we need hyper realism, but there was once another comment I read by a game designer who said something along the lines of "Keep it real. Nobody wants to play a game where you just made up the rules yourself."
People here have talked about how armor abilities are frustrating because you can't predict them. Really, this applies to any situation. If I go into a game and do something, based on what I know, I expect something else to happen. The further removed from the ground of reality you are, the more unstable your foundation becomes. Think of it like building a tower basically.
Well you summed up one of the issues with Halo 4 gameplay design but you're still wrong about bullets.
Yours.
Just a simple question, have you ever shot a gun? How much?
Also, guys, despite not having any kind of major in physics, my Dad is an engineer, and I have several scientist in my family, so I've had to sit through some very long physics talks, so much of it is simply common knowledge for me. It's interesting, but boring as heck if it's not applied to anything (in my way of thinking).
User 73706
Banned
Chettlar is the active alt to the passive Madness.
aHebrewMenagerie
Member
uhhhhh..... no?
Realistic doesn't make for balanced/fun/halo/whateverthefuck gameplay.
I have discovered a truly marvellous explaination for this, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
Yes, I live in the south. When I shoot shit it stops it pretty quickly...that's how guns work! And if we're shooting people in multiplayer (according to your logic) why are we helping them speed away from us? I shoot people in Halo to stop them.
And my grandfather was an astronaut so I guess that makes me one too.
Deputy Moonman
Member
For me it was when they woke the master chief up out of hypersleep. That killed it right there.
Otherwise known as not real.
User 73706
Banned
For me it was when they woke the master chief up out of hypersleep. That killed it right there.
Otherwise known as not real.
Dude, you're supposed to go into cryosleep naked or else the freezerburn is painful. I wanted to step out of that cryochamber waving around my albino gorilla dick like it was a fucking baptism.
ElRenoRaven
Member
I had it happen twice. It just crashes back to the home screen and you have to go in and restart the game. Only game I've had that happen on other then COD which only did it once.
If your applying realism to halo bullet mechanics are the least of your worries.
- Dyson Spheres (I can't wait to hear about your project Waher)
- faster than light travel
- sentient parasites
Slightly Live
Dirty tag dodger
First of all, my point still stands that adding another mechanic to fix a broken/unnecessary one is bad thinking. That's the main point of my posts thus far.
About realism then:
I know everybody will think this is crazy but...Halo is not that unrealistic.
It's like this: firstly, the default for everything is reality as we know it. Right? I mean, that's pretty much what default things: the way things are normally. A simulator attempts to mimic that reality, for example. (I know I'm not being the most clear; I'm trying to be).
Secondly, games are about balance. Life isn't always "balanced" and thus is not always "fun." Fun is never fun when it isn't fair, to which being balanced is imperative. You must be balanced to be fair, since the two words cover the same area.
In a game then, we have to take selective parts out of life -- out of the default of reality -- to cut out things that make life unbalanced. Interestingly enough, it appears, the less "stuff" we have, and the simpler things are, the more fair the game becomes.
If we have two dudes with swords, and these swords kill in one hit (we could go even simpler than that, but whatever), this would be perfectly fair. If I hit him first, he dies. If hits me first, I die. Nobody can complain in this situation.
Unfortunately, that is boring, so we start letting some reality back in. Now a sword can only kill you in one hit if it cuts your head off, and say it can only do that if you pull the sword back above your head to give it more force. More interesting.
Now we give the two guys guns. Let's make up a gun. It doesn't matter, it's still acting like reality. My gun shoots hamburgers that explode. That's fine. It doesn't kill balance with the game, and, believe it or not, it's still realistic. How? Because all I did was make a bomb that looks like a hamburger, the fact that it is a hamburger is unimportant because being a hamburger is not functional. It's just a skin we put over something that explodes. This requires some abstract thought here. It doesn't matter that we don't have exploding hamburgers in real life. It works in the game; it follow reality in all the ways it needs to; the concept is predictable (as long as the person knows the hamburger will explode); and our game is still balanced.
Now we do something strange. Our player knows that the hamburger explodes, right? So he shoots the other dude with a hamburger gun and it explodes on contact. Unfortunately, nothing happens. The explosion has only take 1 % of the other dudes health. We would all agree that this is bad game design. The hamburger gun, then, is useless. We might as well use the sword right? Exactly, so nobody use the hamburger gun now. Why is it bad? Because the explosion doesn't do what explosions do. "But it's a hamburger!" So what? We now know that hamburgers explode. "Yeah, but now we know that explosions hardly do anything!" Exactly. The difference here is that the hamburger being a hamburger doesn't affect gameplay. Not doing anything to your opponent with an explosion does.
End of story, btw. The following is yet another example, basically.
So in our example, nobody uses the hamburger gun until one of the guys looses his sword. In desperation, he goes and grabs the hamburger gun, and shoots a hamburger at his opponent. Then something unexpected happens: this time the hamburger kills the dude instantly. Why? Because "to make it more exciting" we made the gun more unpredictable. Except, this isn't fun. It isn't fun because it isn't fair. "Oh but it is fair because it could happen to you to." No. Fun is also about something else, that I talked about earlier: control. If I can't control what my actions accomplish, then what I am doing is not fun. The further a game gets from the reality of "My actions cause these reactions, maybe with just a little bit a variance, depending on some factors that I am capable of being aware of"; the further it gets from being fun.
Also, sort of nonrelated, but I feel like now nobody wants to take my side lest being called my alt. I swear I do not post using any other account on gaf, nor does anybody else use this one.
For me it was when they woke the master chief up out of hypersleep. That killed it right there.
Otherwise known as not real.
Real this post ^. There are different kinds of realism. Certain types matter. Others do not. Not all things that simply created are created equal, simply by their nature and what they apply to.
You too.
Oh man, so close.
Where is that Spartan Assault review Juices? I'm still looking for reasons to buy it.
ElRenoRaven
Member
I just want 343 to take a step back. Their basics underneath the crap are great. The gunplay is amazing. I don't want to see a ton more shit added. That's the problem we have now. I want them to reduce some stuff.
Basically see Halo 3. Copy that weapon wise. Maybe substitute forerunner weapons for Brute weapons but still keep the numbers low like that. Then just leave the vehicles where they were. Remove the damn mantis. Add no others. Also drop the ordinance shit. Just it doesn't work for Halo. It sucks. I want those and loadouts gone. Same for Armor abilites. I'll settle for equipment even. Covenant weapon wise take it back toward the Halo 3 route. Bring back Plasma Rifle and cut out the crappy wanna be needler clones.
Basically see Halo 3. Copy that weapon wise. Maybe substitute forerunner weapons for Brute weapons but still keep the numbers low like that. Then just leave the vehicles where they were. Remove the damn mantis. Add no others. Also drop the ordinance shit. Just it doesn't work for Halo. It sucks. I want those and loadouts gone. Same for Armor abilites. I'll settle for equipment even. Covenant weapon wise take it back toward the Halo 3 route. Bring back Plasma Rifle and cut out the crappy wanna be needler clones.
Why would a casual user buy Halo 3 redux? Aside from the new campaign that is.
I certainly wouldn't be interested. Small sandbox changes like you suggest wouldn't be enough either. IMO.
EDIT actually, nevermind. Call of Duty doesn't change that much...
Chettlar. The problem is that you asked to be given an example of physics within the game also occurring in the real world. Now for some reason you're arguing against the examples and creating ridiculous scenarios to get across some point no one is understanding.
If you're on about crappy game mechanics such as the stopping power of weapons causing a slow down of the player, I'm sure it's been said that it's a pretty crappy mechanic numerous times.
No idea why you're going into mega post mode over it though.
If you're on about crappy game mechanics such as the stopping power of weapons causing a slow down of the player, I'm sure it's been said that it's a pretty crappy mechanic numerous times.
No idea why you're going into mega post mode over it though.
The point I've been trying to make is why doing the things they are doing is bad game design.
Also, there are things that Halo 3 has issues with that are problems as well, just not as bad because they are more purely mechanical than philosophical-wide problems.
Two wrongs don't make a right applies to game design. If a mechanic in your game necessitates another to "cover it up" then you are, simply put, doing it wrong.
I'm always in megapost mode. I've been working on that, and I think up till now I've been doing a decent job.
I was trying to explain why it's a bad gameplay mechanic.
If you just go up to Frankles and say "Shooting someone to slow them down is a bad game mechanic" why should he listen to? In your guys' situation specifically, you have such different opinions as it is, so he is even less likely to take them to heart.
You don't convince somebody of something by just saying. You convince them by telling them why.
Part of my explaining this type of stuff is that it also helps me understand game design by attempting to explain it. Any teacher knows teaching helps you learn better than being taught. I am by no means "teaching" anybody here (most of you know much more than me) but the same basic principle applies.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
Totally agree.Halo Reach AR was perfect. If you caught someone by surprise in close range you would beat them. AR + Melee wasn't a thing.
But the precision weapons still outclassed it in most situations as they should because they are more finesse weapons that are more fun and satisfying to use.
I played some Halo 4 TS with Tashi and friends earlier this week and we played a game against a bunch of AR users and it was a totaleven though we won by a lot.
My ideal AR is one the scrublets can still use while never being able to kill someone better than them unless they get the drop in close range
- Status